[I]f you wish to understand patterns of long historical sequences, pray for randomness.
—Gould (1993, p. 397)
Abstract
This paper develops a critical response to John Beatty’s recent (2006) engagement with Stephen Jay Gould’s claim that evolutionary history is contingent. Beatty identifies two senses of contingency in Gould’s work: an unpredictability sense and a causal dependence sense. He denies that Gould associates contingency with stochastic phenomena, such as drift. In reply to Beatty, this paper develops two main claims. The first is an interpretive claim: Gould really thinks of contingency has having to do with stochastic effects at the level of macroevolution, and in particular with unbiased species sorting. This notion of contingency as macro-level stochasticity incorporates both the causal dependence and the unpredictability senses of contingency. The second claim is more substantive: Recent attempts by other scientists to put Gould’s claim to the test fail to engage with the hypothesis that species sorting sometimes resembles a lottery. Gould’s claim that random sorting is a significant macroevolutionary phenomenon remains an intriguing and largely untested live hypothesis about evolution.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beatty J (1995) The evolutionary contingency thesis. In: Wolters G, Lennox J (eds) Concepts, theories, and rationality in the biological sciences. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp 45–81
Beatty J (1997) Why do biologists argue like they do? Philos Sci 64(4 supp):S432–S443
Beatty J (2006) Replaying life’s tape. J Philos 103(7):336–362
Ben-Menahem Y (1997) Historical contingency. Ratio 10:99–107
Brandon R (1997) Does biology have laws? The experimental evidence. Philos Sci 64(4):S444–S457
Brysse K (2008) From weird wonders to stem lineages: the second reclassification of the Burgess shale fauna. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 39:298–313
Conway Morris S (2003) Life’s solution: inevitable humans in a lonely universe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Elgin M (2006) There may be strict empirical laws in biology, after all. Biol Philos 21(1):119–134
Gallie WB (1959) Explanations in history and the genetic sciences. In: Gardiner P (ed) Theories of history. The Free Press, Glencoe
Gallie WB (1964) Philosophy and the historical understanding. Schocken, New York
Gould SJ (1989) Wonderful life: the Burgess shale and the nature of history. W.W. Norton, New York
Gould SJ (1993) Eight little piggies: reflections in natural history. W.W. Norton, New York
Gould SJ (2002) The structure of evolutionary theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Gould SJ, Lewontin R (1979) The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc Roy Soc B205:581–598
Gould SJ, Woodruff DS (1990) History as a cause of area effects: an illustration from Cerion on Great Inagua, Bahamas. Br J Linnean Soc 40:67–98
Huss J (2009) The shape of evolution: the MBL model and clade shape. In: Ruse M, Sepkoski D (eds) The paleobiological revolution: essays on the growth of modern paleontology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 326–345
Lenski RE, Travisano M (1994) Dynamics of adaptation and diversification: a 10,000-generation experiment with bacterial populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci 91:6808–6814
Losos JB, Jackman TR, Larson A, de Queiroz K, Rodriguez-Schettino L (1998) Contignency and determinism in replicated adaptive radiations of island lizards. Science 279:2115–2118
MacLaurin J, Sterelny K (2008) What is biodiversity? University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
McShea DW (1994) Mechanisms of large-scale evolutionary trends. Evolution 48(6):1747–1763
Mellor DH (2005) Probability: a philosophical introduction. Routledge, London
Millstein R (2000) Chance and macroevolution. Philos Sci 67(4):603–624
Mitchell S (2003) Biological complexity and integrative pluralism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Okasha S (2006) Evolution and the levels of selection. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Raup DM, Gould SJ (1974) Stochastic simulation and the evolution of morphology—towards a nomothetic paleontology. Syst Zool 23:305–322
Raup DM, Gould SJ, Schopf TJM, Simberloff D (1973) Stochastic models of phylogeny and the evolution of diversity. J Geol 81:525–542
Sepkoski D (2005) Stephen Jay Gould, Jack Sepkoski, and the ‘Quantitative Revolution’ in American Paleobiology. J Hist Biol 38(2):209–237
Sepkoski D (2009a) The emergence of paleobiology. In: Ruse M, Sepkoski D (eds) The paleobiological revolution: essays on the growth of modern paleontology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 15–42
Sepkoski D (2009b) ‘Radical’ or ‘Conservative’? The origin and early reception of punctuated equilibrium. In: Ruse M, Sepkoski D (eds) The paleobiological revolution: essays on the growth of modern paleontology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 301–325
Sober E (1997) Two outbreaks of lawlessness in recent philosophy of biology. Philos Sci 64(4):S458–S467
Sterelny K (2005) Another view of life. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 36:585–593
Sterelny K, Griffiths P (1999) Sex and death: an introduction to the philosophy of biology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Travisano M, Mongold JA, Bennett AF, Lenski RE (1995) Experimental tests of the roles of adaptation, chance, and history in evolution. Science 267(5194):87–90
Turner DD (2009) How much can we know about the causes of evolutionary trends? Biol Philos 24:341–357
Vrba E (1984) Evolutionary pattern and process in the sister-group Alcelaphini-Aepycerotini (Mammalie: Bovidae). In: Eldredge N, Stanley S (eds) Living fossils. Springer, New York, pp 62–79
Vrba E (1987) Ecology in relation to speciation rates: some case histories of Miocene-recent mammal clades. Evol Ecol 1:283–300
Vrba E, Gould SJ (1986) The hierarchical expansion of sorting and selection: sorting and selection cannot be equated. Paleobiology 12(2):217–228
Acknowledgments
I’m grateful for the helpful feedback on this article from audiences at Florida State University, The University of New Hampshire, and the University of Alabama in Huntsville. Many people have helped me along the way, including Michael Baumgartner, Delphine Chapuis-Schmitz, Richard Dawid, Val Dusek, Mehmet Elgin, Simon Feldman, Rob Inkpen, Yoichi Ishida, Nick Jones, Andrew Margenot, John Norton, Michael Ruse, David Sepkoski, Ed Slowik, Kim Sterelny, and an anonymous referee for this journal. My early work on this project was supported by a fellowship from the University of Pittsburgh Center for Philosophy of Science.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Turner, D.D. Gould’s replay revisited. Biol Philos 26, 65–79 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9228-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9228-0